Module 1: Fundamentals

Question 1

Ethics

Answer 1

is the philosophical study of morality

Question 2

Morality

Answer 2

is a system of norms and standards of conduct which prescribe what constitutes right and wrong OR good and bad actions OR behaviour in persons

Question 3

Ethical Theory

Answer 3

a theory attempting to provide a coherent and tenable account of our moral obligation and the moral status of actions

seeks to provide guidance on our actions

Question 4

Metaethical Claim

Answer 4

the nature of what makes something right or wrong according to a system

Question 5

Normative Claim

Answer 5

what you should or ought to do()

Question 6

Three branches of Ethics

Answer 6

Metaethics
Normative Ethics
Applied Ethics

Question 7

Metaethics

Answer 7

concerns the nature and meaning of moral properties in themselves such as right, wrong , good, bad

Question 8

Normative Ethics

Answer 8

The philosophical study, construction and analysis of the moral rules, principles and theories that guide human action and behaviour

Question 9

Applied Ethics

Answer 9

The practical application of moral norms and theories to evaluate real world moral issues or cases

Question 10

How are different right/wrong distinguished

Answer 10

1. Legally right or wrong
2. Prudentially right or wrong
3. Morally right or wrong

Question 11

Legally right or wrong

Answer 11

whether or not something is permitted by the law

Question 12

Prudentially right or wrong

Answer 12

whether or not something is helpful, beneficial or harmful to your long term well being

Question 13

Morally right or wrong

Answer 13

that which is right or wrong according to an ethical theory or moral principle

Question 14

Difference between morally right and morally good

Answer 14

1. something is morally right if it is an action is done according to moral principles, most likely because it is morally good
2. something is morally good if it is worth doing and enhances the life of those doing that thing and/or others

Question 15

How are actions morally categorized

Answer 15

Morally Forbidden actions(impermissible actions) and morally required(obligatory actions)

Question 16

Morally Forbidden actions

Answer 16

actions you ought or must not do because they go against a defensible moral system
-these actions are morally blameworthy

Question 17

Morally required actions

Answer 17

actions that you ought to or must do because they are mandated by a defensible moral system
- these actions are morally praiseworthy

Question 18

How are moral actions categorized

Answer 18

supererogatory actions, suberogatory actions and Morally permissible or neutral actions

Question 19

supererogatory actions

Answer 19

are morally good actions that are not required by our moral systems (goes beyond whats necessary)
-deemed morally praiseworthy

Question 20

Suberogatory actions

Answer 20

actions that are not forbidden under our moral systems but are still morally blameworthy

Question 21

Morally permissible

Answer 21

actions that we can do or are just allowed under our moral systems
-neither morally praiseworthy or blameworthy

Question 22

Kinds of ethical theories

Answer 22

1. Teleological (consequentialist theories)
2. Deontological theories (non consequentialist theories)
3. Character based theories

Question 23

Teleological theories

Answer 23

these theories associate moral rightness with whether our actions or behaviour maximize some goal or aim

Question 24

Deontological theories

Answer 24

prescribe a set of moral rules we must follow without exception
-moral rightness of an action is determined by following the prescribed rules

Question 25

Character based theories

Answer 25

-focus on what constitutes good or bad character -shift away form action to character - interested in how one should behave to be considered a morally good person

Question 26

4 Criterion for assessing moral theories

Answer 26

1. Internal consistency or Coherence of claims ] 2. Consistency with Considered Moral judgments 3. Consistency with Background assumptions about Morality 4. Usefulness in moral problem solving

Question 27

1. Internal Consistency

Answer 27

-this assesses whether the theory contradicts itself -the claims must be consistent with each other and we must bed able to hold all the claims made by the theory true at all times

Question 28

2. Consistency with Considered Moral Judgments

Answer 28

-theory must align strong and informed intuitions about morality - not about an individuals beliefs about something but things most people would agree with upon reflection

Question 29

Consistency with Background Assumptions about Morality

Answer 29

-assesses whether a theory is consistent with what we think or assume morality is like and is for -does it match our assumptions about what morality should do or be -should match our expectations about morality

Question 30

examples of background assumptions

Answer 30

we can assume that a good moral theory: -should result in moral stability -should reflect that people aren't perfect (allows for complexity) -should not be too demanding -should be able to guide us in moral dilemmas

Question 31

Usefulness in solving moral problems

Answer 31

- the theory must be able to guide our moral action -can the theory tell you what the correct moral action to take is in each scenario TEST FOR IT: -is this theory helpful in resolving moral dilemmas or conundrums -does it help us make reliable moral judgments over time and in varying scenarios -can it help us act morally in difficult situations (is it clear on what to do)

Question 32

Types of Fallacies

Answer 32

Begging the question, Appeals to authority, Faulty analogy, Straw man, Ad Hominem Attack

Question 33

Begging the Question

Answer 33

assuming the conclusion in the premises of your argument eg. everyone is good therefore i am good

Question 34

Appeals to authority

Answer 34

perceiving an argument or claim as justified simply because it was said by an expert eg. I think utilitarianism is right because a lot of governments use it to distribute goods

Question 35

Faulty Analogy

Answer 35

the use of a flawed analogy to argue for a conclusion eg. KFC smells good and is finger lickin good. my cologne smells good. therefore KFC and my cologne smells finger lickin good

Question 36

Straw Man

Answer 36

misrepresenting someones claim or argument because its easier to refute

Question 37

Ad Hominem Attack

Answer 37

rejecting a claim simply because of the person who supports it